(There may be more, but I only kept track of these, she posts so much on “denialism,” it’s hard to keep track).

You may review these files, and note that none of my concerns are answered, and are usually deflected by charges of ‘being silly,’ in some manner, or, of course, of being a ‘denialist’.

I hold, and extend, an open invitation to Ms. Smith, or any ‘anti-denialist’ to debate, person to person, by email or phone, on any particular issue relating to Aids.

I have asked Ms. Smith to debate the lack of standardization in “hiv tests.” I have asked her if she would use an “hiv test” on herself, while pregnant (this is the protocol for the poor, brown-skinned, African and Indian in the world), and then voluntarily undergo a course of Nevirapine on herself and her children, as she would have all good African women do.

She responded by not responding, and by accusing me of perhaps, inventing the story that NYC likes to use crack-baby orphans in Aids drug tests.

Ms. Smith has developed a reputation among those who’ve tried to engage her for being a coward, and a fraud.

Those are strong words, but returning a question about the use of “hiv tests” and Nevirapine, with libel, gives a particular impression of wanting to avoid certain issues. For example, the non-standardization and non-specificity of ‘hiv tests’; or the deadly, horrifying toxicity of Nevirapine in many once-living creatures, now dead, who took it.

So, coward is a strong word, and so is fraud, but I think they both fit, based on performance, (though I hold open the invitation to debate, and will be pleased to change my opinion of her behavior.

Coward and Fraud – strong words, but let’s be clear; so is “denialism,” which is the term she uses regularly and with specific intent to describe any who disagree with her about the utility of the Aids paradigm.

“Denialism” is a term, carefully chosen for meaning and emotional response. The term asks the reader to equate those, like myself, who look at “hiv tests” and read that they are neither specific, standardized, or able to diagnose any particular infection, and who therefore question their ethical utility – and those who deny the German/Jewish Holocaust of the 1930s and 1940s.

It is not a mistake that the term is used. It is used specifically, to cause anyone with any sensitivity to run screaming from the argument, lest they make the terrible mistake of perhaps falling into “denialism.”

Ms. Smith and her colleagues at the Aetiology blog are masters of denialism – no, not of the Holocaust – but of truth-seeking, academic debate. They wouldn’t know it if it bit them, because their goal is to dissuade anyone and everyone from looking into the big, black boxes that today’s science promises to fix, fill up, or illuminate for us (like the church of yesteryear), but continuously fails to do so.

Damn us then, for our curiosity. But not for denial. That belongs, today, as on many days, to the ruling authority in matters of belief.

It is worth noting that if Ms. Smith and her colleagues were serious about addressing the concerns created by “denialists”, (that is, academics, writers, citizens, scientists, physicians, community leaders, “hiv positives” and “Aids” patients who disagree with her irrefutable beliefs), she would not have proffered her opinion without deigning to balance it against that of her opposition.

That is, she would have openly, willingly interviewed any of those she condemns. She does not do so, and is incapable of doing so, lest she show her empty hand; this is my opinion, of course, and I am willing, as always, to debate Ms. Smith on open ground, to make and answer charges, and seek clarity. As I am a writer, not an academically-corrected mouthpiece for any institution, it should be easy for her to best me, so I await her answer eagerly. That said, I don’t expect to hear from her anytime soon, though I would welcome it.

It is also worth noting that the Holocaust, which certainly did occur, was a holocaust which grew out of a popular science called Eugenics. Eugenics is worth looking up, to realize that the “risk groups” for which ‘hiv tests’ are considered accurate, are those who have always been considered ‘unfit’, by some rationale or another – Homesexual, Gypsy, Negro, drug user, impoverished persons, etc.

So, I invite the reader to examine at leisure and at will, any detailed information provided by any person or side in this battle royale. I leave you with two articles, which I assembled from 20 years of medical literature on “hiv testing.”

I found the experience of researching these to be tremendously educational, and frankly life-changing. It’s a remarkable thing to understand how human beings validate their biases.

Finally, It’s also important to note, that by attacking those who would demand clarity and transparency in the Aids paradigm, Ms. Smith acts as a functionary (a helpful idiot, to steal a phrase), for a particular point of view, not as an interested, truth-seeking scientist.

It’s one thing to assure the reader that “consensus has been reached,” which is a beautiful little fib she uses as a martinet; it’s another to allow the unwashed masses a chance to actually review and understand the material in question, without being told what to think.

Two posts in one-day form my two of my favourite heretics. It’s almost too much. Celia Farber has posted too. What a feast we have today.

First I thank you too for all you do Liam. You are an inspiration and a sure source of energy that keeps us all going.

Tara Smith is a joke. I have said it before and I will say it always. Her support of the AIDS lie and all it has implied for gay men like myself only confirms her as another homophobe hiding behind science.

How can she debate with you? She can’t. All she can do is hide behind her blog and spew venom, calling us denialists, equating us with holocaust denial. Trying to pass herself off as a champion for gay men, when all she does is push voodoo, toxic medication and defends the validity of “that test” which is the factor that gets the AIDS sleazy ball rolling and is responsible for terrorizing, poisoning, deforming and ultimately killing so many gay men. She also does the same where dark skinned people are concerned too.

Tara Smith is the antithesis of anything scientific. She is a fanatic.

Tara is a supporter of everything that kills. She calls it science.
You call it a Pogrom.

AIDS is a Pogrom, and gay men are starting to wake up and see it for just that.

Here is Celia Farber’s letter, and invitation, from the same thread at BGN.

The gay men who have spoken here must make themselves heard, somehow, to all of the media outlets that continue to maintain the stranglehold that keeps actual voices, true stories, true feelings, out of this very carefully maintained Lenin Bust. (AIDS, according to media)

Tara Smith speaking for gay men is indeed abominable. She writes like a slightly malfunctioning robot–has no original thoughts and less data. As gay men you should demand to be allowed to tell your own history and not have it told for you by people who aren’t even living it, and have never lost anybody to, say AZT.

But in addition to being kept out, gay men are also used as arbiters of where this “debate” stands. You know who I am talking about, the sainted “treatment activists” and other sainted gay media figures: The attack that was launched against me (the latest one, I should say) following publication of my 2006 article in Harper’s that explored corruption in AIDS research, in the US and in Africa, was launched and executed first by gay men.

It began in South Africa with (pharmaceutical activist) Nathan Geffen of TAC composing a libelous and false manifesto claiming I had made 56 errors (at least) in my Harper’s article. Gallo and others signed this defamation and Geffen commanded the global AIDS armies to be sure the attack document went out around the Internet, media, and the world, as fast and far as possible. There was nothing I could do except watch them burn down an article that we took two years to compose and solidify.

The first shot was fired by a gay man at The Nation. What was his name? Richard Kim?

Then the marching orders for the rest of the media were clear: A gay man at the most radical progressive of mainstream periodicals had given the attack command, so everybody else could safely follow suit–and they did.

A gay man was quoted in the NY Times Rue Over Harper’s piece as saying that he used to have “faith” in Harper’s and now that faith was destroyed. I forget his name too. Benjamin Ryan?

It struck me at the time that our society is so upside down, our media so wholly sick, that an article describing the pharmaceutical murder of a pregnant black woman and single mother in Tennessee is later depicted as one that gay men lost faith in Harper’s over. Not lost faith in the medical establishment, the NIH, the doctors in charge, no–these guys were losing faith in Harper’s.

THAT was considered more quote worthy in that piece, by NYT reporter Lia Miller, than, say, the feelings at the home of the dead woman’s family.

Her mother, her sister, her sons. They could have been contacted and asked to comment, but no, instead we were treated to the finer emotions of the editor of Gay City News, upon experience a loss of altitude in his enthusiasm and “faith” in Harper’s magazine. The attacks have been so vicious and persistent that my professional life was made untenable–my work totally mis-represented and vandalized by a pack of informational terrorists.

Can somebody talk to me about what we are going to DO?

People must be held accountable. All those who helped the informational terrorists must held accountable. Gay men must initiate boycotts or in some way find ways to express your rage. It is a rage I empathize with, but it has NOT penetrated the ivory towers of media, so crank it up a few notches. Find ways to insist upon your true stories being told, at least by gay media.

I am going to do my part: I am starting a website that is ALL TESTIMONY. Only stories, only people, only truth.

I would like to offer that I have personally tried to engage Tara Smith in reasonable, factual, point-for-point, issue-specific debate on her blog, only to find that she does not respond to questions that she does not want to answer[1,2].

You may review these conversations, and note that none of my concerns are answered, and are usually deflected by charges of ‘being silly,’ in some manner, or, of course, of being a ‘denialist’.

I hold, and extend, an open invitation to Ms. Smith, or any ‘anti-denialist’ to debate, person to person, by email or phone, on any particular issue relating to Aids.

“Denialism” is a term, carefully chosen for meaning and emotional response. The term asks the reader to equate those, like myself, who look at “hiv tests” and read that they are neither specific, standardized, or able to diagnose any particular infection, and who therefore question their ethical utility – and those who deny the German/Jewish Holocaust of the 1930s and 1940s.

It is not a mistake that the term is used. It is used specifically, to cause anyone with any sensitivity to run screaming from the argument, lest they make the terrible mistake of perhaps falling into “denialism.”

Ms. Smith and her colleagues at the Aetiology blog are masters of what they accuse – denialism – no, not of the Holocaust – but of truth-seeking, academic debate. They wouldn’t know it if it bit them, because their goal is to dissuade anyone and everyone from looking into the big, black boxes that today’s science promises to fix, fill up, or illuminate for us (like the church of yesteryear), but continuously fails to do so.

Damn us then, for our curiosity. But not for denial. That belongs, today, as on many days, to the ruling authority in matters of belief.

It is also worth noting that the Holocaust, which certainly did occur, was a holocaust which grew out of a popular science called Eugenics. Eugenics is worth looking up, to realize that the “risk groups” for which ‘hiv tests’ are considered accurate, are those who have always been considered ‘unfit’, by some rationale or another – Homesexual, Gypsy, Negro, drug user, impoverished persons, etc.

So, I invite the reader to examine at leisure and at will, any detailed information provided by any person or side in this battle royale. I leave you with two articles, which I assembled from 20 years of medical literature on “hiv testing.” [4, 5]

I found the experience of researching these to be tremendously educational, and frankly life-changing. It’s a remarkable thing to understand how human beings validate their biases.

Finally, It’s also important to note, that by attacking those who would demand clarity and transparency in the Aids paradigm, Ms. Smith acts as a functionary (a helpful idiot, to steal a phrase), for a particular point of view, not as an interested, truth-seeking scientist.

It’s one thing to assure the reader that “consensus has been reached,” which is a beautiful little fib she uses as a martinet; it’s another to allow the unwashed masses a chance to actually review and understand the material in question, without being told what to think.

Liam, Celia, and everyone who courgaeously puts the truth out there, thank you. Liam’s video piece on Incarnation House is one of the most viewed items on the site NotAIDS! which I publish as my contribution to the “war effort.”

HIV represents another tile in the wall that the corpororate-government complex is using to blot out personal freedoms, deny individual choice and control over our own physical lives, accumulate obscene resources for the few, and crush liberty of thought.

Tara Smith represents the ignominious zealot who like a lapdog, salivates on the corporate lap, eager to promote the company line. She believes the dollar is almighty, and worships at the altar of the germ. She is the quintesssential “AIDS lover” -without the communal trough that HIV/AIDS has become, Tara Smith would wither and disappear.

The AIDS concept has infected all levels of government, and caused mass hysteria in all corners of the globe. Through brilliant marketing campaigns, public agencies who are supposed to protect the people are hijacked, and become complicit in taking money from the populace to put in the hands of pharmaceutical firms.

NGOs, or “non-profit” community “health centers” target the unsuspecting gay to brand him with the scarlet letters. Epedemiologists salivate at the the thought of a disease to track and a conference to attend where the next Big Idea will be delivered in a white paper to earnest listeners in the audience.

Ignominous zealots can’t wait until you test positive so they can grow their budgets and study HIV-associated car accidents in remote corners of the globe. There, they will announce in a press release that another drug was taken off the market in the West but is working gangbusters on hungry and pregnant mothers in Africa.

Of course the only affliction associated with HIV is the madness inherent in dosing millions of healthy people with toxic pills when what they really need is nourishment and clean water.

They’ll write volumes about the importance of preventing MTCT (mother-to-child-transmission) even though they’ve never actually seen HIV nor been able to get a good look under the electron microscope.

They will ignore the evidence that women who are pregnant, particularly with their second or subsequent neonate, will probably have a false positive HIV test result.

Thanks Liam and to NotAIDS, another truthful website. I think that the site is great to include some natural means to health, which by the way, is all that is necessary to survive an AIDS diagnosis. This is precisely how I managed to do so without the continued use of antiretrovirals. More and more people are learning that this is a flawed hypothesis, which vilolates Koch’s Prostulates with the Viral Load Test, Antibody Test and the CD4 Test not being the best or true indicators of health. Keep up the fight as this fiasco is being turned around!

Hello and Welcome

Official Stories

"Official Stories Exist To Protect Officials"

Donate!

Please donate to keep Liam's unique and powerful work on the air and in print. As little as 10 to 20 dollars helps keep this truly independent work happening. Liam's pioneering investigative journalism and distinctive public voice are not found anywhere else in the media, neither mainstream nor alternative - and Liam is not funded a single corporate sponsor. Keep strong, independent and deep critical thinking alive.
Or, buy books in bulk directly for yourself, colleagues, friends (via Contact page), or suggest "Official Stories" to your local high school or university debate class or club. Thank you!

Philosophy

Before there is anything and beneath everything - is mystery. As soon as you name it, you lose it. As soon as you define it, it disappears. The reality: we can't know the eternal; we can only live in a system of the gentlest ethics: Be kind to others, try to do no harm to people and the world.